It's That Time Of Year When Traders Talk About The S&P 5-Day Rulehttp://www.businessinsider.com/sp-5-day-rule-2013-1/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Tue, 03 Mar 2015 18:50:04 -0500Sam Rohttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e86c0969bedd582300000bhttp://thefountains.atendesigngroup.com/faq/how-do-faqs-work#comment-3770Sat, 05 Jan 2013 13:08:09 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e86c0969bedd582300000b
Rattling excellent information can be discovered on net weblog .
<a href="http://thefountains.atendesigngroup.com/faq/how-do-faqs-work#comment-3770" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >http://thefountains.atendesigngroup.com/faq/how-do-faqs-work#comment-3770</a> <a href="http://thefountains.atendesigngroup.com/faq/how-do-faqs-work#comment-3770" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >http://thefountains.atendesigngroup.com/faq/how-do-faqs-work#comment-3770</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e5a7aa69beddb25e000002marckedThu, 03 Jan 2013 10:45:46 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e5a7aa69beddb25e000002
But this is not an ordinary market that is motivated by free market forces. This is a market that is motivated by QE funding, political votes, and manipulated by computer algorithms. Folks, the fundamentals are not in place for a stable market. Today, the "S" in S&P represents the word Sybil. This market is seductive in it's advances but a trap awaits those who enter. Major hedge funds understand this reality and play the major indexes as a day-trading tactic. With all due respect, a long-term play in these markets is akin to taking your 4.01 to Vegas. Currently, your financial success will be bolstered by a primary attitude of preservation and a secondary pursuit of gain. Also, keep in mind the source of the article--Business Insider. Generally speaking, their editors are some of the most Obama admiring authors so the innate bias will be positive and not critical to the economy nor to our vacant, inexperienced, and agenda focused president.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e5a5d16bb3f7f842000027StockTipsInvestmentThu, 03 Jan 2013 10:37:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e5a5d16bb3f7f842000027
The statistics are more important than what we give them. Of course there is no "scientific" explanation confirming this behavior. But statistically, if the market goes up in the first 5 trading days, then its behavior during the year will be positive. More than 80% of the time, this rule has worked. It would be nice to take it into account, no?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e5a39d6bb3f7e540000007@imageThu, 03 Jan 2013 10:28:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e5a39d6bb3f7e540000007
Heh, all you Moloch worshippers: God wrote the words on the stone tablet.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59d3feab8ea6b37000014mike 123Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:01:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59d3feab8ea6b37000014
it does state 84.69% at the end of the article.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59cb269bedda03d000017Aqua BuddhaThu, 03 Jan 2013 09:58:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59cb269bedda03d000017
IF I remember correctly over the past 4 years both JP Morgan and Goldman managed to make money every day of the year regardless of the market conditions. Now how is that for a NORMAL un regulated performance NORM!
It is only one thing and it is a rigged and fixed market that makes this possible (LIBOR for starters)!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59c99ecad04714400001cBWThu, 03 Jan 2013 09:58:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59c99ecad04714400001c
1/6/12 closed down for the day. That was the fourth trading day of the year.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59b28ecad045e4200002aDave BoudreauThu, 03 Jan 2013 09:52:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50e59b28ecad045e4200002a
"It has worked between 80 to 90 percent of the time."
I'm always suspicious when I see ranges like this. The number of times it works is easily quantifiable. That means that you are either too lazy to do the calculations yourself OR you are relying on the validity of someone else who was also too lazy to do the calculations. Wishy-washiness with "details" like this is usually a red flag.